New Law being looked at.....Is is right? or is it Sinful?

[revrandy]

California is considering a Bill that would allow the Husband to take on the Wife's last name?

What Say YE?

[Michlow]

California is considering a Bill that would allow the Husband to take on the Wife's last name?

What Say YE?

It seems strange, because it is not the "normal" or "traditional" way of doing things. But I don't necessarily see anything WRONG with it. Will that get me labeled as a feminist? :sshhh

[H2H]

It not only seems strange..... I am getting sick.

[Michlow]

It not only seems strange..... I am getting sick.

Why?

[H2H]

Why?

It was a feeling not a logical reaction per say...

as a woman that should be a plausible explanation to you.:killinme:killinme

[Rico]

California is considering a Bill that would allow the Husband to take on the Wife's last name?

What Say YE?


It's been this way in Puerto Rico forever. In fact, men take on their mother's last name. So, had I been born in Puerto Rico, my last name would be Rodriquez Vega. My grandfather was Rodriquez Diaz.

[Michlow]

It was a feeling not a logical reaction per say...

as a woman that should be a plausible explanation to you.:killinme:killinme

Oh, then thats Ok Then. :D

[COOPER]

It's been this way in Puerto Rico forever. In fact, men take on their mother's last name. So, had I been born in Puerto Rico, my last name would be Rodriquez Vega. My grandfather was Rodriquez Diaz.

I Did know you have a Puerto Rico background, Cool.

[COOPER]

California is considering a Bill that would allow the Husband to take on the Wife's last name?

What Say YE?

Is allowed now anywhere else?

[revrandy]

I don't really have a problem with it...depending on who has the better last name....

I could see a man with the last name of Butts wanting to take his wife's name... or Teats... for that matter..

[Michlow]

I don't really have a problem with it...depending on who has the better last name....

I could see a man with the last name of Butts wanting to take his wife's name... or Teats... for that matter..

Many right now choose to do the hyphonated thing. Which if you ask me if the better alternative. Though there are probably some combinations that wouldn't be prudent. Like Butte-Tocks :heeheehee

[Rico]

Many right now choose to do the hyphonated thing. Which if you ask me if the better alternative. Though there are probably some combinations that wouldn't be prudent. Like Butte-Tocks :heeheehee


Or Butte-Munche :lol

[Michlow]

Or Butte-Munche :lol

Especially if the man in questions' first name is Harold (or some derivative of) :D

[Rico]

Especially if the man in questions' first name is Harold (or some derivative of) :D



Heheheheheheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeee! :killinme

[Trouvere]

My legal name is Dartez-Cooper. I did it because my father had no living male heirs to carry on his name after both of my brothers died at eighteen and
twenty five.It was a way to carry his name.I haven't planted it on my children but it used to be a tradition that children carried both the womans last name and the dads last name.The womans last would be the middle name.If my parents would have followed suit my name would have been
D.Frith-Dartez instead of Dartez-Cooper.I have it on all my licenses state and medical.

[Rachel]

It's not a sin. It's a preference - totally up to the couple.

[Sam]

I don't see anything wrong or sinful with that. I guess we can call ourselves whatever we want.

I've preached on the wife taking the husband's name and comparing it to the Bride of Christ being called by her Husband's name. I've used Gen 5:2 where God called "their name (singular) Adam." It's a good thought for preaching and I believe we are called by our Beloved's name but I don't see how that should result in some kind of a civil law requiring married couples to use the husband's last name only. Those things are just traditions and vary from time to time and place to place.